NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-20170
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company
( (Chesapeake District)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
of Railroad Signalmen on the Chesapeake and Ohio
Railway Company (Chesapeake District) that:
(a) The Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement,
particularly Rule 1 (Scope), when it assigned and/or allowed
an employe of another craft to repair one of the Stevens Car
Retarder Air Compressors, located at Stevens Yard Hump, on
October 13, 14, 15, 26, and 27, 1971.
As a result,
(b) The Carrier now compensate Signal Maintainer H. H. Clark
and Signal Maintainer Helper E. V. Cotcamp at their applicable time and one-half rate of pay and in
of time as worked by Carrier's Road Mechanic for the violation cited in part (a):
October 13, 1971 - 8 hours October 26, 1971 - 4 hours
October 14, 1971 - 8 hours October 27, 1971 - 4 hours
October 15, 197_1 - 8 hours _
/Carrier's File: 1-SG-303/
OPINION OF BOARD: A new 200 horsepower air compressor that had been in
service for approximately three months became inopera
tive due to mechanical problems. The Carrier called in a Road Mechanic,
a member of the Machinists Graft, to assist in repairing the compressor.
It is the Signalmen's position that the work involved herein is generally
recognized as Signal work; and the fact that the air compressor is an in
tegral part of the Stevens Car Retarder System, as the car retarders can
not function without the air compressor, thus demonstrates that such work
rightfully and contractually belongs to the employees of the Signalmen's
Craft. The Carrier disagrees that the air compressor is necessarily an
integral part of the retarder system; and the Carrier contends that the
work performed by the Road Mechanic properly belongs to the Machinist
Craft, not Signalmen.
Award Number 20660 Page 2
Docket Number SG-20170
This is the most recent claim for decision by the Board involving the Stevens Hump Car Retarder Syst
on the status of certain labor required in wiring two 75 horsepower compressor motors, which motors
necessary for operation of the car retarder system. The Board in Award
9210 concluded that the Signalmen's claim was proper as provided by the
provisions of their Scope Rule. In Awards 19850 and 19852, as in the
present dispute, both cases involved work performed by other than Signal forces on air compressors a
and both Awards sustained the position of the Signalmen. So also Award
20321 sustained the position and claim of Signalmen in a dispute concerning work performed on an ele
Signal forces at the same Stevens Hump Yard facility. We are of the
opinion that the facts of this dispute fit within the principles of
Awards 9210, 19850, 19852 and 20321 and we therefore shall sustain the
claim.
Notice was given to the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. This Board ha
cover Signal work.
Concerning the claim for compensation, we shall sustain the
claim, but only to the extent of requiring payment at the straight time
rate of pay.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the
whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Parties waived oral hearing;
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute
are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was violated.
A W A R D
Claim sustained as per Opinion.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
OVAUZodoo
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
IV
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 21st day of March 1975.
i.3 .